BottleOfBlog

Insomniac Theatre

Since it's 3:14 a.m., I'm, of course, wide awake and desperate for entertainment.  Preferably, something educational.  That's guaranteed to put me to sleep.

So, anyway, I was just watching the Al Franken Show on the Sundance Channel.  And Al had Smoking Joe Conason, who swings a mighty and righteous Big Hammer, and Ed Klein who recently wrote a book about Hillary Clinton which was so bad that even Peggy Noonan recoiled in horror from it.

I think the show will be broadcast tomorrow--or today.  You know, in human time.  If you get a chance, listen to it.  If you can find it on Air America's website, listen to it.

It's a fucking hoot!

It's basically about fifteen minutes of Joe Conason beating the living bejesus out of Klein.  Joe beats him senseless with the Big Hammer, then pries Klein back out of his chair with the claw end, straightens Klein out, then hammers Klein back into the woodwork, puts wood putty over him, stains him, polishes him, and moves a couch over him, so that no trace of Klein can ever, ever again be seen by decent company.

It's basically what the nightly news should look like each evening if we had--never mind a liberal media--but a media that wasn't thoroughly and completely dominated by conservative corporations and their obediant mouth pieces.

Klein looks so stupid and dishonest, at the end of the small segment, you'll be amazed that anyone hates America and Americans enough to publish such a volume of--at best--careless lies. 

At one point, while getting the wire brush treatment, Klein, in a shocking flop sweat, starts to whine that he didn't know Conason would be on the show with him!

It's fantastic.  It's hilarious!

And Klein, of course, you all know, was an editor at the New York Times.  Part of that ol' liberal media.  Where Joe Conason could never get a job.  Because Conason, embarrassingly enough, actually knows what he's talking about.

How do Republicans stand it?

The Department Of Mysteries

The other day, I was in a store around the corner from me and I bought something with a twenty dollar bill.  It was brand new.  Crisp.  Colorfull.  One of those striking big head bills.

And the girl behind the counter, the second she took it from me, she grabbed a magic marker and defaced it.

She marked a little yellow slash on this perfect, brand new twenty dollar bill.

Now, this wasn't the first time I had seen someone behind the counter do that.  So I said to her, "Why do you do that?"

And the girl said, "I don't know.  They just told me to."

They, I took to mean, were the store managers.  Maybe I'm wrong about that.  There are, after all, portions of the Patriot Act that are actually too top secret to even publish in the Federal Code.  Maybe it was Albert Gonzales, who had told her.  And she wouldn't tell me why for fear of deportation to Cuba, endless, unrepresented detention, and torture.

If so, I don't blame her for bullshitting me.

It is, after all, hurricane season.  Not exactly the time to be hooded in the Gulf Of Mexico.

I didn't press her on it.

But now I'm obsessed with the yellow magic marker slashing of twenty dollar bills.

What's the deal?  Who knows?  Why do these people keep defacing perfectly good, crisp twenty dollar bills?

If anyone knows, and it isn't a violation of Title 18 of the United States Code--even the super secret provisions--please tell me.  It's driving me crazy.

Oh, also, if it's something boring and stupid, make up something neat and cool and tell me that, instead.

How To Get This Thing Started

Another one for Cookie, who can't seem to figure out the sublime joy of being soaking wet and barefoot and singing stupidly, "Let it rain, let it rain, let it rain..."

...turn it up!  Turn it up!  Turn it up!  Turn it up!

The War At Home

I read this earlier today and just had to laugh:

But Ms. Schmidt is a proven battler, having bested several better-known candidates, including Pat DeWine, the son of Senator Mike DeWine, in the primary. She contends that although voters respect Mr. Hackett's military service, it will not be the deciding factor.

…Charles Hartman, a Democrat turned Republican, agreed.

"It's a positive thing for him," Mr. Hartman, a substance-abuse specialist with a nonprofit group, said after meeting Ms. Schmidt. "But we're not at war here."

For those of you who don't know what this is in regard to, Hackett is a Democrat in Ohio.  He's an attorney running in a special election for a House seat in Congress.  In the nineties, he had spent time in the Marine Corps.  And, after the invasion of Iraq, volunteered to, and did, serve in Iraq.

Since this special election has begun, Republicans have been attacking his service.  Some right wing nuts have been claiming that he only served to put it on his political resume.  Some, including his opponent's campaign advisor, have claimed that , as a civil affairs officer, he wasn't really in combat.  Some are claiming that he wasn't even in Iraq.

Does anybody notice a pattern here, from the "We Support The Troops", "There Is No Higher Calling Than Military Service" Republican party?  A lifetime of service, a couple of purple hearts, a chest full of medals, shiny silver stars on your shoulders?  The Gee Oh Pee says you lack character.

If you're a Democrat.

Volunteer for combat, get your legs and an arm blown off, the Gee Oh Pee says you dropped a grenade on yourself on the way for some beers with friends.  And, you get accused of being lucky to have done it in Vietnam.  So you could get some political mileage out of three of your four limbs.

If you're a Democrat.

Volunteer for combat, fight, earn a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts, and what does the Gee Oh Pee say about you?  You did it for political purposes.  You weren't really wounded.  You weren't really in combat.  You shot teenagers in the back.

If you're a Democrat.

Hell, the Gee Oh Pee has so little respect for our fighting men and women, they not only denegrate the men and women who fight, but they denegrate the very symbols of our soldiers' valor.

I mean, who can forget:

Purple Heart bandaids?

Or:

Purple Heart Cookies?  Three scratches and you're out!

Or:

Tossed Medal Salad?   With little Purple Heart crutons, or some such disrespectful shit.

That's funny stuff!  No apologies offered to all you men and women out there, who fought, and who are now blinded and burned, and crippled and crapping in bags for the rest of your lives.  Your Purple Heart is a joke!

To the Gee Oh Pee, anyway.  The Gee Oh Pee loves and supports our military so much that they take the symbol that, aside from a folded American flag, most honors the sacrifice an American can make in combat and they sprinkle it on a salad.  Ha ha!  They make silly cookies out of it!  Ha ha!  They equate a combat wound with Bandaids!  Ha, ha, ha!

But only if you're a Democrat. 

As right wing nut, and propagandist, Michael Graham says:

Turns out, it was easier than I thought, at least in Iraq. When you're listening to a 20-year-old kid from Indiana tell how he earned his second Purple Heart, speechlessness is the natural reaction.

Wow!  Michael Graham was speechless at a soldier recieving a second Purple Heart.  But, again, the Gee Oh Pee wore Bandaids to mock John Kerry's three Purple Hearts.  They accused Wesley Clark of being a little...well...unstable for receiving his Purple Hearts.  They said Max Cleland was lucky, when he got his legs and an arm blown off, for being in Vietnam or he wouldn't even have got a silly  Purple Cruton at all!

And all of these people, like Hackett, get accused of volunteering for combat or getting blown up in combat for crass political purposes.

Kerry only served because he wanted to go into politics.  Cleland was lucky to be blown apart or he would never have gotten into politics.  Hackett only went to Iraq so he could go into politics.

It's amazing, isn't it?  Nearly half the country is Democratic.  And Democrats fought the First and Second World Wars, and Korea, and, stupidly, Vietnam.  But none of them really fought.  None of them really earned their medals.

The only people who are serious about military service or our armed forces are people like Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.  Because they had the character to never fight.  They had the character to actively avoid fighting.  So they could keep their political motives clean.

I mean, if they had fought, someone might accuse them of fighting only for political purposes.  Having never fought, they can honestly say they never braved bullets just to get elected.

How scummy can these right wing nuts get?  How insane and disturbed is your modern Republican party?

First of all, there's nothing wrong with entering military service to help your career.  George Washington did it.  Thomas Jefferson did it(yeah, he did.  You can look it up.)  Every single general in the Pentagon did it.

You know who didn't do it?  Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Dick Cheney, Ronald Reagan, Tom DeLay...you get the picture.

If you're really disturbed by the idea that someone only entered the military to advance their career, then, well, again, we'll have to bulldoze the Pentagon.  And West Point.  And Anapolis, and the Air Force Academy...

So, even if that were true, it's a stupid thing to say.  And only stupid people believe it.  Would you, or anyone, spend a year in Iraq for a two year stint in the House of Representatives?  Would you put life and limb on the line to be in the Republican dominated House?  Why?  Nearly no Republicans have! 

It didn't seem to hurt the Chicken Hawk faction.

Secondly, if I were a psychologist, hearing Republicans constantly accuse men and women who serve in the military of ulterior motives would be very revealing to me.  The term "projection" comes to mind.

When I hear mainstream Republicans dismiss things like service, and courage, and sacrifice as nothing more than politics that leads me to believe, in their minds, those words they throw about so freely and cheaply, really do amount to nothing more than politics.

You know, the most dishonest people you'll ever meet, the biggest liars you'll ever meet, always think everyone else is dishonest and a liar.

Why?  Because it's how they think.  It's what they'd do.  It's how they'd act.

Being thoroughly corrupt, it never occurs to them that some people really are honest.

And so when I hear mainstream Republican politicians dismiss military service and sacrifice as purely political, all I can think is:  That's what the modern Gee Oh Pee really thinks about War and the military and service and sacrifice.

That's what your lives mean to the modern Gee Oh Pee.

It's all political.  It's all about votes and dollar bills, and K Street.  Props and backdrops.  Campaign commercials.

If they had the guts, that's what they'd do--pick up a weapon for no other reason than to run a political campaign.

How embarrassing for Republicans.  How embarrassing for the modern Gee Oh Pee--that the flag you wrap yourselves so tightly in is nothing more to your political leaders than a stage prop, that your sons and daughters in uniform are nothing more a campaign slogan.  That's awful.

Well, that's awful enough.  But its compounded with the utter dishonesty of people like Charles Hartman.  "[W]e're not at war here"???

That's a statement I tend to agree with.  But to hear it from a Republican???  After four years of "We're at war!"  "This is a war against terrorism!"  "In times of War, people need to sacrifice civil liberties!"  "I'm a War President!"  "I make decisions in the Oval Office with War on my mind!"  "In times of War, the American people need to back the President!"

Unless a Democratic combat veteran runs for Congress. 

Then, we're not at war.

And combat's not really combat.

And danger is pretty safe.

And sacrifice is actually a career opportunity.

And the Marines are really pussies, except for the Marines who vote Republican.  They're tough.  And great.  But the other ones suck ass and are a bunch of fags.  And Civil Affairs officers are worthless and hardly even in Iraq.  Except the Republican Civil Affairs officers who are doing a fantastic job and winning the war in Iraq and reconstructing the country, and are essential to our glorious victory!

Those guys are the real heroes of Iraq. 

But not the Civil Affairs officers who return to America and run for Democratic office.  Those guys are losing the whole war for us.  Bunch of opportunistic, lying, cowardly rear echelon mutherfuckers!

Blah, blah, blah.

The war the Republican party has been fighting since September 11th is against the American people.  That's it.  The little people.  The shareholders, the taxpayers, the soldiers, the laborers.

And they'll use anyone or anything to fight it.  And they'll fight it against anyone, even the very people they're using.

Shit Hits The Fan Made In China

Says Palast:

In case you haven't the least idea what the heck it means for China to "float" its currency, let me put it in the language we economists use: China's float don't mean squat.

Yet our President, a guy whose marks in Economics 101 are too embarrassing to publish here, ran out to hail the fact that buying Chinese money will now cost more dollars.

The White House line to the media, swallowed whole, is that by making Chinese money (yuan) more expensive to buy with dollars, Americans will buy fewer computers and toys from China -- and US employment will rise.

This will happen when we find Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Economics Lesson #1: You can't change the value of goods by changing the value of the currency on the price tag. As my comrade Art Laffer wrote me, "If cheap currency makes your products more competitive, all automobiles would be made in Russia." Driven a Lada lately?

Economics Lesson #2: Don't take economics lessons from George Bush. Or Milton Friedman. Or Thomas Friedman. What that means, class, is don't believe the big, hot pile of hype that China's zooming economy is the result of that Red nation's adopting free market economic policies…

America’s only response is to have Alan Greenspan push up real interest rates so we can buy back our own dollars the Chinese won in the export game. The domestic result: US wages drifting down to Mexican maquiladora levels.

And Krugman says:

But if the Chinese stopped buying all those U.S. bonds, interest rates would rise. This would be bad news for housing - maybe very bad news, if the interest rate rise burst the bubble.

In the long run, the economic effects of an end to China's dollar buying would even out. America would have more industrial workers and fewer real estate agents, more jobs in Michigan and fewer in Florida, leaving the overall level of employment pretty much unaffected…

In the short run, some people would win, but others would lose. And I suspect that the losers would greatly outnumber the winners.

Mostly, I like Paul Krugman.  But that sounds like a bunch of hooey to me.  But I'm not an economics professor, if you are, please feel free to chime in.  But really--with a marginally rising yuan, does Paul Krugman or anyone really think the American steel industry is coming back???  Or textiles?

The dollar's going to have to fall quite a bit before Nike starts making shoes in America again.  And if it falls that far, I don't think anyone's going to consider themselves a winner to have a job in a shoe factory.

I think they're going to feel pretty much like the people who have jobs in Pacific rim shoe factories right now--happy they've got something to eat this week, but not exactly a winner.

But he finishes strong:

And what about the strategic effects? Right now America is a superpower living on credit - something I don't think has happened since Philip II ruled Spain. What will happen to our stature if and when China takes away our credit card?

I can answer this one!

The Great George W. Bush Tax Hike Of The Twenty First And Second Century.

I wish I still had that stupid $300 check.  I wish I had framed it.  I could show it to my grandkids.  Tell them "This is where your future started to unravel."

Maybe the Smithsonian has one.  Do you think the government will still be able to afford the Smithsonian by the time I have grandkids?

With Democrats Like These, Who Needs Republicans?

This morning the Wall Street Journal reported that Senate Democrats were planning “to grill Bush confidant Karen Hughes” about her involvement in the ever widening leak-case. But, Senate Democrats must have gotten lost on the way to the hearing. Not one showed up.

Instead of any substantive questions, the Democrats simply didn’t show up. But we did get this statement from ranking minority member Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)…

I am particularly interested in and supportive of the nomination of Karen Hughes to be undersecretary of state for public diplomacy ... I believe that she is highly qualified because of her professional background, and, importantly, enjoys the full confidence of the president and the secretary of state.

What does Joe Biden think Karen Hughes is so qualified to do?  What exactly is the undersecretary of state for public diplomacy all about?

WASHINGTON, March 14 - Karen P. Hughes, one of President Bush's closest advisers, was nominated today to be under secretary of state for public diplomacy and given the mission of trying to repair the image of the United States around the globe, especially in the Arab world...

That's right.  Karen Hughes' appointment is to be the American embassador to the Arab world.  Her job is to repair the image of the United States which Bush so thoroughly trashed. 

To me, that sounds like a really important job.  Particularly in light of the fact that 3000 Americans were killed by angry Arabs on September 11th.  Particularly in light of the fact that the whole trillion dollar, America altering War on Terra is based on the ill will of some Arabs, some Muslims, towards the United States.

So, to me, that sounds like just about the most important government job there is right now.  And it sounds like a job that would require a really keen insight into the Arab world--an understanding of the culture, familiarity with the customs and traditions, the beliefs, the prejudices, the grievances--the mindset--of the Arab world, knowledge of the history of the Arab world, and probably speaking some Arab language wouldn't hurt.

And Joe Biden, who couldn't be bothered to even fucking show up for the confirmation hearing--he sent a letter!--says that he feels Karen Hughes' is highly qualified because of her "professional" background.

And what is Karen Hughes' "professional" background?

Mrs. Hughes is a former Executive Director of the Republican Party of Texas and a former television news reporter for KXAS-TV, the NBC affiliate in Dallas/Fort Worth. Mrs. Hughes is a Phi Beta Kappa and summa cum laude graduate of Southern Methodist University, where she earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in English and Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Journalism. She is an elder and long time Sunday school teacher in the Presbyterian church. She is married with a grown stepdaughter and a teenage son, and tried to bring a “Mom’s perspective” to our nation’s public policy debate.

Yep.  Read it again.

She was a small market TV reporter in Dallas/Fort Worth.  With a B.A. in English and a B.F.A. in Journalism.  Oh, yeah, she's also an elder and Sunday school teacher in the Presbyterian church.

Shit, if you had magical powers, you really could not even dream up a person with more experience, more expertise, more knowledge, more understanding, more insight into the Arab world than Karen Hughes.

Hell, anybody who knows anything knows that Southern Methodist University's unofficial nickname is "The Texas Arabs"!  Beyond that, English is like the third or fourth language of most Arabs.  And, finally, she's an extremely abrasive and obnoxious bleach blonde American woman, who is sure to act as a soothing balm to those extremely sexist, Western hating fundamentalist Muslims who keep blowing shit up.

Again, you could not have dreamt up a better candidate for such an important job.

At least, not since Ariel Sharon already has a job.

And Joe Biden, the ranking Democrat, who didn't even bother to show up, says--sorry--writes "she is highly qualified because of her professional background". 

And this turd--Biden, not Hughes--is thinking about making a run for the White House as a Democratic candidate???

What an idiot.

Give it up, Joe.  Switch parties now.  It's not too late.  You've still got time and you're easily incompetent enough to still get a job in the Bush administration.

As for the Democratic party?  You ain't getting dick from us.  Except contempt. 

It's only fair, after all.

The Devil You Know

People are pretty upset about this John Roberts bidness.  Probably they're right.  I just haven't been able to feel one way or the other about it at all. 

Mainly because any really strong emotions I had about Supreme Court nominees I had in 2000, back when I really didn't feel too much about Bush one way or the other.

Back then, I thought Bush was just kind of a goofy yutz.  Entirely pointless, but relatively harmless.  Based on how he represented himself, at the time, I was actually kind of amused.  The guy obviously had no real interest in politics--that is:  policy or governing.  The guy had close to no experience.  He didn't have one single professional success to hang his hat on.  And, even during his campaign, he didn't seem like he could even be bothered to try to pretend he was qualified to be president.

You might remember this astonishing moment, reported here by rabid right winger Michael Kelly, during the 2000 campaign:

In his [first foreign-policy address] Bush made seemingly knowledgeable mention of nuclear-arms reduction treaties, including START II. But when Russert asked Bush what number of nuclear weapons he would consider acceptable for the United States and for Russia, Bush could only reply:  "That's going to depend upon generals helping me make that  decision, Tim."

That's right!  Candidate Bush brought up START II in his own foreign policy speech.  And Candidate Bush trumpeted his position as a reason the American people should vote for him.  But when he was actually asked, now that you bring it up, Govner, what exactly is your position?

Bush said, "That's going to depend on what other people tell me."

And his responses about nearly everything were like that.  You know, Bush talked about a humble, isolationist foreign policy.  Mostly because, after fifty years on this earth, and a Yale education, and a father who had been an ambassador, the head of the CIA, the Vice President, and the President, he didn't know dick about the world.  Nothing. 

Bush knew about Texas.  And Saudi Arabia.  After that, the globe was a big freaking mystery to him.  He didn't know and, frankly, he didn't care.

Whenever anybody asked Bush about the world outside of Saudi America, he would laugh, call them "Stretch" or "Baldy" or "Legs", and tell 'em he's gonna have hisself a whole posse of for'n policy experts and four star genrils to tell him what to do. 

Bush didn't need to know hisself nuthin'.  Hell, if'n he wuz da Preznit, he'd have hisself a whole room full of computers!  Just a wirrin' and a giggin' and a spittin' forth answers to questions people ain't even a asked yet!

Bush sounded like the quintessential upper management moron--he didn't need to know the details.  Hell, he'd pay people to know the damn details!  All he needed to do was yell loud enough and them little people would see to it that them problems fixed themselves!

My friends and I howled at his candidacy.  We thought, "Jesus, George, why go through all the bother to be president?  Why not just send Al Gore an email--on the internet Al Gore was so instrumental in creating--with the names of all the people you believe to have the answers?  Who needs you?  Why not cut out the middle man...or in this case, the middle idiot?"

I mean, it was funny. 

Then. 

Here was this guy who didn't give a good God-damn about anything except tax cuts for people in his income bracket, about getting rid of the estate tax, which only effected people in his tax bracket, and cutting taxes on dividends and capital gains, which mainly benefited people in his tax bracket.

It was hilarious.  I had never actually seen a guy run for president solely on a platform of personal concerns.

Again, it was like watching a guy run for mayor only because he wanted to get a pothole in front of his house filled in.

With the amazing peace and prosperity of the 1990s and the fantastic job Bill Clinton did as America's First Ambassador, spreading American goodwill around the globe, it seemed like this rather disinterested, kind of goofy and ineffectual, agendaless George Bush couldn't really do too much damage even if he were elected to the White House.

The economy was booming.  The government was running a surplus and paying down our national debt.  Taxes were low.  American military might was viewed by the rest of the world as invincible.  Social Security was about to be shored up for the next hundred years.  And, for the first time in my lifetime, people in Europe and Africa,and South America, and Asia actually showed up in enthusiastic throngs just to glimpse the American president.

Hell, in half the countries around the world, there are streets in their capitols named "Bill Clinton Boulevard" or "The Bill Clinton Highway".

How much damage could one isolationist, tax cutting, bored, disinterested, lazy frat boy do?

The only thing--well, maybe not the only thing--but the big thing I was worried about was the aging members of our Republican dominated Supreme Court.  And I was livid when I would hear people in the Green Party idiotically echo Ralph Nader's childish and naive and self serving statement that "There is no difference between George W. Bush and Al Gore".

It was obscenely dishonest from Ralph Nader.  It was irresponsible and foolish from the people who believed him.

When you vote for the President of the United States, you don't vote for one person.  You vote for thousands of people.  You vote for every cabinet head, you vote for the head of every government agency, you vote for federal distict court judges, circuit court judges, and, yes, Supreme Court Justices.

And when four million Americans, who were complaining like little children that their votes didn't count because they couldn't have everything they wanted, cast their votes for Ralph Nader, making sure their votes didn't count, I pretty much lost my interest in the debate over the next Supreme Court Justices.

Because, people, Bush is going to appoint at least two.  There isn't any way around that.  That deal was done the second FOX News announced Bush's presidency.  It's horrible.  It may be worse.  He may appoint three or four--there are a lot of old people on the Court, you know.

Please, God, let it only be two.

But he's going to appoint at least two.  Frankly, it's his right.  He's in the White House.  Democrats can filibuster or hit as hard as they can during confirmation hearings, but what's the difference?  If it isn't this guy, it'll be some other goon, someone just like him.  How do you feel about Ted Olson?  He's on the back burner!

And no matter who it is, it won't be someone you like.  Bush isn't Bill Clinton.  Clinton chose Justices he knew would not divide the country.  Clinton chose Justices that he was sure would be confirmed easily, that were acceptable to the Republicans in Congress, and would be accepted by the sixty percent of the nation which isn't insane.

Bush doesn't care about that.  He's got a 42% approval rating.  And he's got both Houses of Congress.  He'll nominate anyone he can get through and fuck the 58% of Americans who don't like it.

Bush has gone from upper middle management to CEO.  You don't like it?  You can sell your stock or fucking quit.  What you can't do is come to the Board meetings.

Is Roberts horrible?  Maybe.  Who knows?  Should I be upset about it?  I was upset about Roberts before I ever even knew he was alive.

Should I be upset about it now? 

Hell, no!

It's like being upset about old age--we all knew--or should have known--this was coming when we were a lot younger.

On the bright side:

Number one:  Anne Coulter hates this guy.  He can't be all bad.

Number two:  People, George W. Bush is picking him!  Nothing George W. Bush has ever done has turned out right!  He is The Disaster Monkey!  He's the Inverse Midas--everything he's ever touched turns from gold to crapola.

If Bush likes Roberts, Roberts has a very, very good chance of being a disaster for Republicans.

Number three:  You can't tell how these things are going to go.

I don't want to sound like a "reasonable" Democrat--in other words, a moderate Republican.  But the history of the Supreme Court has been a history of surprises.

In our lifetimes, the most liberal Justice to ever sit on the Supreme Court was a guy named Will Brennan.  And he was brilliant.  He may have been the most brilliant Justice to ever sit on the Court.  And he was a big ol' liberal.

And do you know who appointed him? 

Eisenhower.

And do you know why?

Because Brennan was a good, reliable conservative.

These judges, these Justices, go to law school, they study the law, they study the hisory of the law, and they spend their careers pandering to political parties and politicians to get appointed to Federal courts or to the Justice Department.  Sometimes they're awful party hacks.  Sometimes they're shameful whores.

But a funny thing happens when the get to the Supreme Court.

They get the black robe, and a big office, and a bunch of Harvard law clerks, and a lifetime appointment to the bench.  And some of them, not all, but some of them, get a sense of history.  Well, not just a sense of history.  What they get is a realization that they are really a part of history.  That they're making history.

And no one can stop them--they can't be fired.  And impeaching them is nearly impossible.

And they realize that every decision they write, every decision they concur on, every decision they oppose is going to be written down and remembered, and studied, and critiqued by every American law student--people just like them--until the end of America.

And they realize that every decision they're involved with--never mind lawyers and judges and law students--is going to be commented on and recorded by the every day Americans those decisions effect.

And most--not all--but most Justices rise to the occassion and do the right thing.  Most Justices, whether out of concern for their own legacy or whether, under the scrutiny of an entire nation and history itself, they surrender to their own better natures--most Justices do the right thing.

That is the reason we have a Supreme Court with seven Republican Justices and two Democratic Justices and the wing nuts still insanely keep calling it a liberal Supreme Court.

It isn't liberal.  It isn't even Democratic.  It's just been handing down, for the most part, the right decisions for sixty years.

And it drives the right wing nuts insane.

Will Roberts be a good Justice?  Who knows?  Who can possibly know? 

He might be a fucking nightmare.  He might be another O'Connor.  He might be another Will Brennan.

Is this a fight for Democrats?  I don't think so.  Again, beat Roberts--and who's next?  Ya think he'll be better?  It has to be somebody.  I've seen the short list.  It's all awful.

Things might have been different.  You know, George W. Bush ran on a platform of restoring honesty and dignity to the White House.  Funny, now, isn't it?  But he could never have done that if assholes like Joe Lieberman or Joe Biden hadn't condemned Bill Clinton's very run of the mill, very human failures as shocking and appalling, and worthy of censure.

It has nothing to do with anything, but when whoever gets appointed to the Supreme Court, you should remember, whoever they are, they're as much Joe Lieberman's and Joe Biden's appointees as Bush's.

So, I don't know.  I don't have much of an opinion on it.  If you do, please comment.  I enjoy hearing it.

The only opinion I really have is that, whoever it is, I still think it's better than Thomas, who was a very, very cynical choice.  Because Thomas was and is a very stupid man.  He's an absolutely empty seat on the Court.  He hasn't contributed anything, good or bad, in a dozen years on the bench.  His entire career on the Court could be summed up by:  "What Scalia said!"

What a waste.  What a joke for one favorable vote.  But the modern Gee Oh Pee will do that--show utter contempt for our most treasured institutions.  For cheap political purposes.  How embarrassing for them.

Is Roberts more of the same?  Who knows?  With these people you can't know.  All I can say is that Roberts is a bright man.  Unlike Thomas.  Roberts is, at least, smart. 

Maybe he won't be able to stand being stupid.
 

Chinese Recognize A Fire Drill When They See One

My good friend Cookie links to this hilarious article about the most incompetent foreign policy team of all time:

In the last year, Washington has urged the other parties to the six-nation disarmament talks - Russia, Japan and South Korea - to refrain from offering further incentives to the North and instead to push the Chinese to use their considerable leverage over its leaders to persuade them to return to the talks.

But China refused, so the South Koreans took the lead. On June 17, South Korea's unification minister, Chung Dong Young, traveled to Pyongyang, the North Korean capital, and met with the North's leader, Kim Jong Il. Mr. Chung promised that if North Korea abandoned its nuclear weapons program, South Korea, on its own, would string power lines across the border and begin delivering up to 2,000 megawatts of electricity, enough to solve the North's dire energy crisis…

In that same meeting, Mr. Kim said for the first time that the North was ready to rejoin the disarmament talks….

A senior administration official traveling with Ms. Rice indicated that the Bush administration was startled, and pleasantly surprised, when the South Koreans told of their "very generous" energy offer, as this official put it.

Administration officials insisted that they did not know why North Korea had suddenly decided to return to the talks, but seemed to go out of their way to dismiss the South Korean offer.,,,

In the last few months, South Korea devised the energy plan and then told Washington about it…

As late as Tuesday night - while Ms. Rice and her aides were preparing to meet with South Korea's leaders - a senor administration official directly involved in North Korea policy, said, "I haven't seen the proposal yet; you are asking me about something I haven't seen."

It's priceless, isn't it?  After years of fucking around with North Korea, years in which North Korea, under the brilliant Bush foreign policy dream team, kicked out the U.N. weapon inspectors and built a couple of nuclear weapons, a transcontinental ballistic missile, and engaged in WMD proliferation with our new(under the Bush idiots) good friends, the Pakistanis--after all that, these incompetent clowns we call our The Bush Administration urges other countries to refrain from offering incentives to North Korea.

And South Korea, by this time, well aware of how stupid our government is, just ignores that, offers North Korea some incentives and...WHAMMO!

North Korea is back at the disarmament talks!

And the Bush idiots are, by their own admission, "startled" and "pleasantly surprised"!

Jesus, God, Almighty!  Are these the stupidest people on the planet or WHAT??? 

They don't know what they're doing, they don't know what's going on--they're surprised!  But, unlike the chaos in Iraq, at least this time it was pleasant!

These are the people who are responsible for handling a diplomatic situation with nuclear weapons and a delivery system that can reach California!!!

"Surprised" is not a word I ever want to hear from these stupid, stupid, stupid, incompetent fools.

And then, to make matters worse, after they've already completely screwed the whole situation up, after it's gotten completely out of hand, after the South Koreans finally have to just ignore these Bush idiots and do what should have been done years ago, on their own, against the advice of the Bush morons, what do the Bush clowns do?

They take credit for South Korea ignoring their stupid advice!

Unbelievable.

Cookie's post is better than mine.  I just can't get calm enough about this to be coherent.  Read her post.  That's what I meant.

But I will add something.  I don't have the link and I've spent far too much time looking for it.  If anyone else can find it, I'd love to have it.  Please send it.

But, a couple of years ago, I think in the Spring of 2003--though it may even have been in 2002--I was reading an article about how badly Bush and his insane clown posse were screwing up the situation in North Korea.  And this article had the most priceless quote ever.  It was so good, I still remember it years later.  It totally summed up the chaotic, leaderless, imbecility that is the Bush administration.

At the time, North Korea was in talks with the United States--Bolton may even have been fucking everything up at the time--and the Chinese were trying help the negotiations, which were rapidly deteriorating.  Because of the Bush idiots.

And, finally, in a moment of blunt desperation, one of the Chinese diplomats says to one of the Bush international morons:

"Look, we really don't care what your position is.  We just want you to have one."

That's your Bush government.  Even the Chinese are shocked at it's lack of diplomatic skill.

God help us all.

More On Stuff I Don't Care About

Here's Ed Rogers, a Republican lobbyist and former Reagan and Bush, Sr. White House official on the Plame matter:

I don't think Karl Rove is at the center of this investigation so much as he is at the center of a Washington political frenzy that tends to happen in the summer.

And also I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don't think there's any meaningful investigation about that. I think it's taken another turn.

And here's a horse's ass with some more horse shit:

"The extreme left is once again attempting to define the modern Democratic Party by rabid partisan attacks, character assassination and endless negativity," said Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., chairman of the GOP congressional campaign committee. The Republican National Committee, virtually a political arm of the White House, urged GOP lawmakers to go public.

And more craziness from a closet case, self loathing party hack:

Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said Rove was the victim of partisan political attacks by Democrats.

When all else fails, start yelling "partisan politics"!

This whole investigation into Karl Rove is nothing but pure politics!  This is nothing but a partisan witch hunt by the extreme left!

This is, frankly, no different than when the Republican House in the nineties launched dozens of investigations into the Clinton White House for purely political purposes!  It's no different than when Republicans demanded and got two independent prosecutors--because the first one, Fiske, a Republican,  came to a conclusion that the Republicans didn't like and was replaced by Starr--to harrass the Clinton White House for years!

Well, actually, Republicans got three independent prosecutors--because after a hundred million dollars, and thousands of investigative hours, and a phoney baloney impeachment, Starr had nothing, got bored, shrugged his shoulders and left the whole obscene mess to Ray.

Then Starr went to Pepperdine, where he wanted to go back in 1997, when he already knew his investigation was a bad, ugly joke.  But he got bullied into staying by Republicans who were horrified that, if the independent prosecutor just left in the middle of his investigation, the American people might comprehend what an awful, empty, pointless charade not only the entire Whitewater investigation was--but what a clown bananza the entire Republican Congressional class of '94 was.

So Starr stayed long enough, just to hand the dinner check off to Ray and then got the fuck out of Dodge before the locals showed up with just enough rope.

All partisan politics.  That's all this investigation is.  Just like Whitewater.

Except for one little thing...

(CBS/AP) The Justice Department has launched a full-blown criminal investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA officer, and President Bush directed his White House staff on Tuesday to cooperate fully with the probe…

Four Senate Democrats, including Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., urged Attorney General John Ashcroft to appoint a person of "unquestioned independence and impartiality…"

Ashcroft declined a direct response to their calls for a special counsel, saying Tuesday that "because of an ongoing investigation of criminal violations, I will not be making any further comment at this time…"

The investigation stems from a CIA complaint two months ago that one of its agent's identities had been disclosed. Justice gets about 50 such complaints from the CIA each year about leaks of classified information and few ever get beyond a preliminary investigation.

The investigation was not prompted by Democrats.  Hell, Democrats can't even get a hearing held in either house of Congress, never mind get an independent prosecutor appointed.

The investigation was prompted by a formal complaint by the CIA to the Justice Department.  The CIA was pissed off that one of their valuable covert operatives had been outed by the White House.

Democrats didn't do shit.  They're not unhappy about it.  But they didn't start it.  And they have no control over it.

Unlike Kenneth Starr, the extremely partisan and conservative "independent" prosecutor who harrassed the Clinton White House for years, this investigation is being run by a Republican United States attorney, appointed by the Republican Justice Department, in response to a formal complaint by the CIA, which last time I checked, was run by a Republican.

And, as for this ridiculous assertion that Valery Plame was not a covert operative, do you really think the CIA would lodge a complaint if she wasn't??? 

Don't you think the CIA knows who their own covert operatives are?

It's so embarrassing what Republican politicians, Republican "pundits", and Republican operatives are willing to say to Republicans.  Because that's what this is all about--Democrats don't care what these jabber monkeys say.  The United States attorney doesn't care what these bullshitters blather on about.

This horseshit, this total disinformation campaign is directed at Republicans.  To keep the 43% and shrinking faithful.  To reassure them that this White House is not full of incompetents and criminals.

Republicans want to believe they didn't make the worst mistake in the history of presidential politics when they pulled that lever for the Disaster Monkey--twice--and so these jokers are willing to give them something--anything--no matter how dishonest to keep on believing. 

These guys are willing to say what the base wants to hear.

Even if it's a total, embarrassing lie.

Democrats aren't perfect.  They aren't White Knights--far from it.  I often bitch about the crap-ass job many of them do(America's Greatest Congressman Henry A. Waxman, excepted).

But at least they don't regard their own party as a bunch of gullible morons.

Christ, at least Democrats don't actually hate the people who vote for them.

Oh, That "Liberal" Media, Part Who Can Possibly Count

I know I just got through ranting about how I didn't care about Karl Rove completely screwing the nation for cheap and mean political reasons, but this is actually pretty funny.  This is how "liberal" CNN--or as barking mad right wing nuts like to call it:  Clinton News Network--ends a story regarding Rove's involvement in the Plame investigation:

A survey of more than a dozen Republicans who live outside Washington found most siding with the White House. "It's a tempest in a teapot," said Denzil Garrison, former state GOP leader in Oklahoma.

"I have not heard a person bring it up in Michigan," said GOP consultant John Truscott of Lansing, Michigan. "It's just not an issue out here."

I mean it--that's the end.  Those are the final words in the article.

A "survey of more than a dozen"???  Wow!  Well, there you have it!  Those are some solid facts to put in a news story.  Any statistician will tell you:  if you want an accurate polling of any group, any population at all, you need to ask at least twelve people.  Preferably fourteen.

But never thirteen.  That's  a hard and fast statistical rule.  Because it's unlucky.

And look at the Republicans they ask!   A former state GOP leader and a GOP political consultant!  And CNN stupidly reports that they're siding with the White House!

No shit.

Jesus Christ, these are people who would side with a pair of mismatched socks if those socks were Republican.  Why not ask Karl Rove's mom?

How is this news?  How is this part of news story?  How is this, in any concievable way, relevant?

I guess this is the "balance" we keep hearing about from right wing nuts.  First, we'll have some facts, some quotes, and some relevant reporting of the issue, then we'll have the most biased people in the world simply deny the facts are true.  And that, if you're insane, is balanced news coverage.